'It has been said that more than a majority ought to have been required for a quorum; and in particular cases, if not in all, more than a majority of a quorum for a decision...In all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule: the power would be transferred to the minority. Were the defensive privilege limited to particular cases, an interested minority might take advantage of it to screen themselves from equitable sacrifices to the general weal, or, in particular emergencies, to extort unreasonable indulgences."Do I need to state the relevance of this passage to today's situation in Congress? Through misuse of legislative privileges (most notably the filibuster in the Senate) power has been effectively transferred to the minority, and what is more, with exactly the result predicted by Madison at the founding of our republic- an "interested minority- the very rich- have indeed screened themselves from "equitable sacrifices to the general weal," and have continuously extorted "unreasonable indulgences."
Could there be a more succinct and accurate portrayal of what has gone on in this country the last decade or so, as the Republican party has transformed itself into the party of subversion? But of course, Republicans, who constantly manufacture opinions to put into the mouths of the founding fathers, have no interest in what the founding fathers, with considerable wisdom, foresaw. All the Republican talk about "original intent" is, like most of what they have to say, nothing but noise intended to shout down reasonable and informed opinion, in their unstoppable zeal to extort "unreasonable indulgences" for the rich criminals who pay to keep them in office.
That's mainly what I have to say about this, but I can't let Madison go without reprinting what he says next:
"Lastly, it would facilitate and foster the baneful practice of secessions...a practice subversive of all the principles of order and regular government; a practice which leads more directly to public convulsions, and the ruin of popular governments, than any other which has yet been displayed among us."Once again, Madison proves prescient. We have seen, the last few years, continuous threats by Republicans to secede, so confident are they in their divine right to rule the country, regardless of the outcome of elections. As they dwindle more and more into a minor segment of the American people, and as their anger at their marginalization (which need never have happened, if they had not claimed superior rights for themselves all along) grows, their toying with the essential fabric of our country may very well bring about the "ruin of popular government," completing the job of wrecking the nation in the name of patriotism that they began in 1860.
Jefferson and Madison, two of the finest. It has been said that Jefferson over shadowed Madiso, and perhaps that is so. However, we owe Madison much, even today. Those who really care to understand.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Green Eagle.
Secession, nullification -- of course they want no part of Democracy and no part of any laws not designed to protect it.
ReplyDeleteNicely said, GE.
The thanks should go to Madison- he saw the danger far in advance. We, unfortunately, are watching it right in front of our eyes.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post Green Eagle. I did a post a couple of years ago about the founding fathers and their religious views in response to someone who insisted they were all devout Christians or some such.
ReplyDeleteUsed their own writings to disprove the lies being told about their desire for a "Christian Country." Despite all the effort I put into quoting directly from our dear FFs, the right wing posters ignored it all and continued down the foggy path.
The fog is a good place to hide ignorance, ill-will and self servitude.
His views on religion are even more angry than mine and Jefferson's, especially when it comes to the political power of Churches. Of course the chief enemies of Democracy have been established religions who, since Biblical times, have insisted that power legitimately descends from above and from below. It's blasphemous to deny the power of kings by divine right and hence treasonous.
DeleteUnfortunately Marx recognized this use of religion for tyrannical and oppressive government, just as Madison did and that enabled us to identify the secular movement, the secular politics of the Constitution with Communism - our new secular Satan.
Is it becoming blasphemous to deny the divine right to rule of our corporate aristocracy?
Excellent, G.E.
ReplyDeleteAnother phrase for this is "the tyranny of the minority." And that's exactly what we're living with. The present-day GOP reminds me of the conservative Democrats of the 1850s and 1860s south.
They ARE the conservative democrats of the 1850s and 1860s.
DeleteThat explains the strange teeth and why you don't see them in mirrors.
DeleteThe tyranny of a majority is just as amoral as the tyranny of a minority. It merely depends on which side of the tyranny you find yourself.
ReplyDeleteWhat depends on which side you're on? I think tyranny is a state of affairs defined independently of whether you like it or not. Don't ask me to do that, though. I have my biases.
DeleteBut yes, perception of tyranny has everything to do with what side you're on because people are dishonest, self-serving and contemptible pigs and the slaveholding Confederates saw the abolitionists as tyrants. Some Republicans seem to think that keeping someone from pissing in the well is tyranny. As to what I think of them, see above.
What you say is true Captain Fogg.
DeleteUntil such time as society, in general, learns to live by a ethical, moral, and reasoned set of standards (such as respect for all and personal responsibility for ones own actions just to name two) I fear you are right.
Republicrats and Demicons are but cousins in the same game of deception.
At one time I would have argued with you, but I'm so disappointed by the many causes I support in principle, but not in their extremism and hyperbolic rhetoric. It's as though a cause itself becomes the object of the cause, so anything done to generate enthusiasm and income for the cause is justified.
DeleteIn a back issue of Time Magazine (February 11, 2013), Michael Grunwald writes: "The electorate is getting more diverse, less rural, more educated, less evangelical - in short, less demographically Republican. It's also getting less hostile to gays, gun control, even government - in short, less ideologically Republican."
ReplyDeleteThis frightens the traditional Republican base, namely aging white men who are threatened by the emerging power of minorities - women, the black and hispanic communities, and young, well-educated urbanites.
How has the GOP reacted to these changing demographics? POORLY, to say the least! That is why Republicans continue to push more voter ID laws designed to suppress turnout of these constituencies - especially in states with large minority populations.
Take the great state of Mississippi for example - that grand bastion of freedom and equality - legislators have offered a plan to nullify "unconstitutional federal laws." Please note: Most legal scholars consider Mississippi's so-called state sovereignty bill an unconstitutional act.
No, you can't reason with people who see their political preeminence slowly slipping away.
It is likely that 300+ years hence all America will be some shade of brown. Of course I won't be here to see it, but if I were a betting man...
DeleteThis is what some fear. I my view it is inevitable, it is not "bad", ans therefore, SO WHAT.
Maybe eventually everyone will 'get it'.
I'm all for a Latte electorate. The geographical separation that is responsible for our different appearances is less of a factor and sure, the world's prodigal populations will eventually be re-united by and by, and we'll have to find some other reason to distrust and disrespect each other. We'll do it though -- for are we not men?
DeleteI've long been amused by how many Northern Chinese seem to look down on and mistrust the southern, Cantonese speaking people as a different "race" because I can't tell the difference. The Narcissism of small differences?
Octo:
DeleteLess rural for sure, but so much of what made us unique had to do with being rural and self sufficient. I think we lose a very great deal by becoming ant hill dwellers, as specialized in our function as hive dwellers. Yes, I think the future of America looks a lot like Singapore does today, but I fear it comes with a price tag.
I fear the notion of privacy, for instance, will be washed away with the ease of surveillance and the necessary stress on security and the institutionalized mistrust that goes along with it. I fear the increasing isolation from the natural world, the ignorance of it, the lack of appreciation of it and the personal helplessness that comes from such isolation will have sad consequences for that natural world and for our freedom itself.
I see the rise in interest in survivalism, doomsday prepping, apocalypse prediction, extreme sports and risk taking and the like as being part of a hidden longing for personal independence and a fear of a life where we're all forced to be so specialized as to be totally dependent on others for every microscopic facet of our lives as more and more of us are absorbed into the matrix. Why is everything we see for sale marketed as "natural" "Artisinal" "Organic?" Because everything is really artificial, mass produced and made on the other side of the world under conditions that we fear to know about because that's where the world of Industrial Revolution, stage II is really going.
Why do so many troglodyte paper pushers and salesmen of intangibles feel the need to climb Everest, hike across Antarctica and jump off bridges? It's the hunger for reality that urbanization and overpopulation and overspecialization and the sacrifices we're forced to make for safety and security causes.
Captain,
DeleteNo doubt what you say here, but the issue I raise is one of electoral demographics, and the GOP doesn't seem to get it. There is this article for instance: Republicans’ whites-only gambit will spell doom.
Yes, it is changing, at last. Like Jesus, Bobby D was a bit premature about saying a new day was at hand and we were all wrong in thinking the fact that a new post war and post Depression generation coming up would soon push aside the old ways. The old ways have a nasty way of coming back again like zombies and vampires and suits with narrow lapels.
DeleteI don't know how the changing ethnicity will play out in the long run though. I'm not a profit nor was meant to be, but I would think traditional racism has got to be in retreat along with other traditional ideas and traditional nonsense. I think it may be dangerous to predict what future, more diverse generations might think though, humans not sharing the advantage of invertebrate intelligence.
But still, maybe it will change enough that we might get a few good ethnic restaurants here in Wonder Bread and Velveeta America. Not that I don't like Soul Food and Cracker Cooking. Hey I remember when Pizza was "foreign" food and people threw things at me for driving a Volvo. Maybe we can even get rid of Starbucks and Wendy's Tuscan sandwiches and get the real Italian goodies down here in the swamps. Maybe it will get so hard to demand papers when everybody you see looks Guatemalan or Chinese that they'll give up?
But who knows? Anything that pisses off the Repugs feels like that rising sea breeze on an August afternoon.
If you really want to piss off Repugs, we need to elect a black woman as president in 2016.
DeleteIn that case, I nominate Sister Sheria Reid of the Swash Zone. A trained lawyer, she is renowned for instituting Sheria Law.
DeleteYes, I second that.
DeleteAnd I second your second! Is that a quorum?
DeleteYes, the face and color of the existing power structure is changing...and it is scaring the shit out of them.
ReplyDeleteTOO BAD!
Change or be left behind.
I am highly honored. I need a campaign slogan and a running mate, any takers?
ReplyDelete